The Overbearing EPA

[Ryan Ruck]

President Obama's EPA Gives Pollution Exemption To GE

One of the hallmarks of just government is equality under the law. To consider a country free, all of it's citizens must be treated the same by the courts. Wealth, social status, and political popularity cannot enter into the equation.

The alternative to the rule of law can only by tyranny. Once equality before the law is relinquished, all that remains is the favor of political elites.

There has already been quite a stink generated because of the numerous exemptions granted to the health care legislation. The Washington Times has reported that 733 exemptions have been granted. The message behind these exemptions is obvious. Obamacare is impossibly expensive, and impossible for companies to actually comply with. Therefore, favored political campaign contributors can escape if they have powerful enough lobbyists.

How the Obama administration expects this obvious violation of the 14th amendment to stand is beyond me. The amendment says in part, "No State shall...deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

It doesn't take a law professor to see that there might be some potential issues here. President Obama and his administration know it too. Do they think they are so far above the law that it doesn't matter? The justices on the Supreme Court, if they have any integrity at all, will shoot this down in a heartbeat. Is Obama planning to engineer some sort of showdown with them?

Obamacare isn't the only area where the current administration is playing fast and loose with the constitution. The EPA recently started new regulations for greenhouse gas emissions from power plants and others.

These regulations are of course controversial, in no small part because they are being implemented by executive fiat without any congressional involvement. The revelations of Climategate may also have some role. Man-made global warming was revealed to be a fraud, and yet Obama and the EPA are acting on it anyway.

Well, it looks like exemptions are already being granted for these regulations too. A partially completed power plant built primarily with GE components has been able to gain an exemption from complying for these new rules.

This would be despicable enough if there were no ties between Obama and General Electric. However, there are a number of reasons to think more personal corruption is involved. GE's CEO Jeffrey Immelt is a member of Obama's Economic Recovery Advisory Board. In addition GE donated half a million dollars to Obama's campaign fund.

This sort of corruption is antithetical to a free society. Obama is acting like a dictator in a tin pot banana republic, not the President of the United States of America.

[Ryan Ruck]

EPA Spilled Milk Regulation Indicative of Broader Problem

February 3, 2011

EPA to Regulate Spilled Milk.

No, it’s not a headline from The Onion. The Wall Street Journal editorial board explains:

Two weeks ago, the Environmental Protection Agency finalized a rule that subjects dairy producers to the Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure program, which was created in 1970 to prevent oil discharges in navigable waters or near shorelines. Naturally, it usually applies to oil and natural gas outfits. But the EPA has discovered that milk contains “a percentage of animal fat, which is a non-petroleum oil,” as the agency put it in the Federal Register.

In other words, the EPA thinks the next blowout may happen in rural Vermont or Wisconsin. Other dangerous pollution risks that somehow haven’t made it onto the EPA docket include leaks from maple sugar taps and the vapors at Badger State breweries.

The EPA rule requires farms—as well as places that make cheese, butter, yogurt, ice cream and the like—to prepare and implement an emergency management plan in the event of a milk catastrophe. Among dozens of requirements, farmers must train first responders in cleanup protocol and build “containment facilities” such as dikes or berms to mitigate offshore dairy slicks.

These plans must be in place by November, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture is even running a $3 million program “to help farmers and ranchers comply with on-farm oil spill regulations.” You cannot make this stuff up.

If the administration truly believes regulating Häagen-Dazs suppliers will help prevent another BP-scale disaster, it’s no wonder a federal judge decided to hold it in contempt this week for is gross mishandling of the Gulf spill response. These dubious decisions reinforce the notion of just how far current regulatory overreach extends.

This is just the latest example of regulatory overreach. EPA knows no limits to intrusion in our lives or the fact that it should be allocating its resources to the risks that produce the largest return to the public. Obviously, the administrator doesn’t understand more bang for the buck.

[American Patriot]

When did spilled milk become a pollution risk?

LMAO.

Ok, this is bordering on the insane now.

Einstein said, "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."

Wikipedia says, "Insanity, craziness or madness is a spectrum of behaviors characterized by certain abnormal mental or behavioral patterns. Insanity may manifest as violations of societal norms, including becoming a danger to themselves and others, though not all such acts are considered insanity."

I suspect they are both right. The government, specifically lower agencies and bureaucracies... (Not at the word bureaucracies contains the word "cracies" - which could be pronounced "crazies") have this weird habit of doing the same stupid things in order to get different results. Alternatively, these agencies are full of people who are doing things which are AGAINST SOCIETAL NORMS... like crying over spilled milk, instead of clearing it up. Or, in this case, making it a pollution source.

WTF?

[vector7]

Horrible… Obama Now Making Up Stuff About Coal Industry In Order to Block Production

By Right Network on 04/20/2011 – 10:19 am PDT -- Headlines

Worst. President. Ever.

On Sunday April 25, 2010, President Barack Obama attended the memorial service in West Virginia for the 29 miners who perished in the nation’s worst mining disaster in 25 years. During his speech to the families Obama praised the coal miners and “the fruits of their labor that so often we take for granted.”

“Five miles into a mountain. The only light, the lamp on their caps. Day after day they would burrow into the coal. The fruits of their labor that so often we take for granted. The electricity that lights up a convention center; that lights up our church or our home our school our office. The energy that powers our country. The energy that powers the world.“

President Obama praised the coal industry at the miner memorial service.
Coal-Hater Obama Praises Coal Miners For the Energy They Bring America

In January the Obama Administration, for the first time ever, blocked an already approved bid to build one of the largest mountaintop removal coal mines in Appalachian history.

Now… Obama is just making stuff up in order to block coal energy production.
Via FOX Nation and CNSNews:

President Barack Obama claimed that coal could create “the kinds of air pollution” that is “creating asthma for kids,” in speaking at a town hall event in Annandale, Va., on Tuesday. However, the National Institutes of Health says that “the exact cause of asthma isn’t known” and that “asthma is different for each person.”

“The challenge with coal is that although it’s very cheap, it’s also dirty. And it can create the kinds of air pollution that not only is contributing to climate change but is also creating asthma for kids nearby,” Obama said in answer to a question about balancing deficit reduction with government spending on clean energy.

“You got asthma? Okay. And so sucking that stuff in is not ideal,” said Obama. “So what we’ve said is, let’s invest in clean coal technology that potentially can capture some of these particulates and some of the carbon dioxide that’s going into the atmosphere.”

Asthma, however, is not caused by coal, or the emissions from coal-fired power plants, as the president suggested. According to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) the true cause of asthma is unknown, although scientists believe it is caused by a confluence of genetic and environmental factors or early viral infections.

[American Patriot]

Citing Jobs and Environment, More Unions Backing EPA
Monday 25 April 2011
by: Jeremy Brecher and Brendan Smith , Labor Network For Sustainability

At the start of 2011, as the energy corporations, the US Chamber of Commerce, and the Tea Party right launched their assault on environmental protection and the EPA, it looked like public opinion and organized labor might just be swept along. Instead, much of the public and the labor movement have rallied in support of EPA and environmental regulation. The result has been a standoff on legislation to decimate EPA authority to protect the environment. But whether it will be possible to prevent the backdoor effort to gut the EPA by cutting its budget hangs in the balance.

In a March 14 article titled "EPA Tangles With New Critic: Labor," the Wall Street Journal reported that "several unions" are demanding that the EPA "soften new regulations" that "could put thousands of jobs in jeopardy." It noted an analysis by the United Mine Workers saying that proposed EPA regulations could put 250,000 jobs at risk in the utility, mining and railroad sectors. It cited a letter from a coalition including Boilermakers, Mine Workers, and Utility Workers to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson saying that a a tightening of standards on ground-level ozone would "have a significant impact on our states' workers."

The article also described a "delicate alliance" developing between the Boilermakers, the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, and American Electric Power Company, "one of the nation's top coal burners." It described a meeting held at request of the CEO of AEP with the president if the IBEW and Rep. Fred Upton, the new chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee and a leading opponent of the EPA that discussed "concerns about the impact of new EPA regulations."

While the article gave the clear impression that labor was turning against the EPA, it did acknowledge, "not all unions take a dim view of the EPA's moves." It cited the Plumbers and Pipe Fitters, whose general president said that the EPA's mercury rule could create thousands of jobs for workers who build and install pollution control equipment.

But in fact, union support for the EPA goes far beyond that and is growing.

On March 15, the day after the Wall Street Journal article, the BlueGreen Alliance, a union-environmental coalition backed by ten major unions, issued a statement supporting "the actions by the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act" and urging Congress to "reject efforts to weaken this authority." Their release on the statement was headed, "BlueGreen Alliance brings Together Unions and Environmentalists in Support of EPA Efforts to Protect Public Health and Safety." It noted that, complemented by clean energy policies, regulations will create jobs and increase America's economic competitiveness.

The BlueGreen Alliance includes the Steelworkers, Communications Workers, Service Workers, Laborers, Utility Workers, American Federation of Teachers, Transit Workers, Sheet Metal Workers, Auto Workers, and United Food and Commercial Workers.

Endorsing the statement, Michael Langford, president of the Utility Workers said, "With the right policies and investments that help America's industries retool, including the rapid deployment of clean energy and technology assistance for maintaining good jobs, we believe the EPA measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions will position the United States to compete in an ever-cleaner and more efficient 21st century economy."

Michael J. Sullivan, president of the Sheet Metal Workers, said "Our members are making buildings healthier and more efficient. They understand the importance of clean air. With responsible action by the EPA on the Clean Air Act, we will make America cleaner and more competitive."

Service Employees president Mary Kay Henry said, "We have to get moving on common-sense solutions to improve the environment and to improve the public health of workers and our communities. Regulating greenhouse gasses, along with these common-sense policies, will do that while also creating good jobs and launching the US to the head of the pack in a race for the global clean energy economy."

The BlueGreen Alliance is actively organizing to defend the EPA. The agenda of its Pennsylvania State Summit of labor and environmental leaders noted, "Without Federal comprehensive climate legislation, the EPA is tasked with enforcing the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act. We must defend the authority of the EPA. Our labor and environmental partners are working together to ensure that this is a win win situation for cleaning up the environment; preserving jobs; and creating job opportunities in a clean energy economy."

On March 17, three days after the Wall Street Journal article appeared, the UAW gave a stirring defense of EPA regulation before a subcommittee of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works. Legislative Director Barbara Somson told the Committee, "What our experience shows us is that the Environmental Protection Agency's regulation of greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles under the Clean Air Act is good for our industries and good for American jobs."

The regulation of mobile sources, she went on to say, "has been a 'win-win' that results in greater oil independence for our nation; a cleaner, healthier environment for ourselves and our children; and an increased number of jobs in the auto sector." The new technology required to meet tailpipe emissions standards "represents additional content on each vehicle" which requires "more engineers, more managers, and more construction and production workers."

According to the UAW, programs that increase the fuel efficiency of vehicles are already creating substantial numbers of jobs. The Department of Energy's Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Incentive Program, for example, has made five loans that are already responsible for supporting 40,000 jobs. Tens of thousands of additional jobs are expected from the program's incentives for advanced vehicle batteries, which are expected to help boost the US from 2 percent to 40 percent of the nations production. The UAW says such success depends on "the regulation of tailpipe emissions under the Clean Air Act" and that "the continuing recovery of the automobile industry in the United States has as its foundation the regulatory certainty of these tailpipe emission standards."

UAW legislative director Somson concludes,

The members of the UAW are also citizens who are deeply affected by the environment in which they live and raise their families. They are concerned about the effects of human-induced climate change for themselves and for future generations. The benefits to human health and welfare flowing from the regulation of greenhouse gasses under the Clean Air Act are substantial and have decided positive economic effects.

Another endorsement comes from Hector E. Sanchez, Executive Director of the Labor Council for Latin American Advancement, a constituency group representing Latino workers from both the AFL-CIO and Change to Win Federation. On April 4 he co-signed a letter from the National Latino Coalition on Climate Change, of which he is Vice-Chair, to Senator Mark Udall calling for the upholding of the Clean Air Act. The letter pointed out that Latinos are more likely to live in counties with high air pollution. It asked Senator Udall to oppose "any measure that would block or delay the US Environmental Protection Agency from doing its job to protect all American from life-threatening air pollution." The result of proposed amendments restricting EPA authority would be to "exacerbate poor health outcomes in the Latino community."

While the attack on the EPA has received considerable support from business and the Tea Party, the evidence strongly argues against a groundswell of opposition to the EPA within labor, other than from unions like the Mineworkers that have long questioned its approach. In fact, far more unions appear to have joined the pushback in support of the EPA.

It is also doubtful that the public has accepted the charges that the EPA is a rogue agency or that its regulations hurt jobs. A poll conducted for the American Lung Association by a Democratic and a Republican firm and released February 16 found that three out of four voters support the EPA setting tougher standards on air pollutants and fuel efficiency. Two-thirds oppose Congressional action that impedes the EPA from updating clean air and carbon emissions standards. 69 percent believe that EPA scientists, rather than Congress, should set pollution standards.

The Wall Street Journal article quoted a labor official saying that if EPA regulations cost jobs in Pennsylvania and Ohio, the Republicans would blast every Democratic lawmaker with it. However, another poll raises doubt that public opinion has accepted the anti-EPA message in those states. A survey of the presidential battleground states of Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Michigan conducted by Hart Research Associates and released March 28 found that almost two-thirds of voters there want the EPA to set greenhouse gas standards for industrial facilities. According to a memo accompanying the poll, "By large margins, voters of all political parties trust the EPA more than they trust Congress. Democrats trust the EPA over Congress by 77% to 11%, independent voters do so by 63% to 12%, and Republicans by 48% to 28%." Voters oppose Sen. Jay Rockefeller’s proposal to block EPA regulation of greenhouse gasses for two years by exactly two-to-one.

The failure of powerful opposition to EPA regulation to emerge among labor and the public may be partially responsible for the narrow defeat in the Senate in early April of Mitch McConnell and James Inhofe's legislation that would have blocked the EPA from regulating greenhouse gasses. Three other anti-EPA bills, including Jay Rockefeller's two-year ban on EPA regulation of greenhouse gasses were defeated by much greater margins.

The attempt to gut the EPA has now moved to the far murkier arena of the budget debate, where anti-EPA forces can act with far less scrutiny from a pro-EPA public. In the just passed continuing resolution that will fund the government until September, the EPA budget was slashed by 16 percent. All funding for NOA's climate science service and for the White House energy and climate change adviser was eliminated.

No doubt the struggle over the EPA will continue around both its authority to regulate to protect the public’s health and environment and around its future budget. Advocates for the EPA should feel confident that they will struggle to protect it with the backing of the public and much of organized labor. Indeed, the successful defense of EPA authority may prove to be a turning point in the struggle for policies that protect people and the planet.

[vector7]

Companion Threads and Post:

• Gas Crisis - The High Price of Driving
• Obama Administration Imposes Seven-year Drilling Moratorium
• Obama: We will end 'manipulation' of gas prices
• Obama Coal Crackdown Sends Message to Industry
• Obama pulling back on Nuclear Power while reducing Oil and Coal

Obama Clears the Way to Shut Down Oil Production in America's Richest Source of Domestic Energy, the Permian Basin of West Texas

By Gate on April 25, 2011 11:30 AM | 1 Comment
by Chuck Wolk

From the moment Richard Nixon created the EPA in 1970, and signed the Endangered Species Act (ESA) into law, they have been the primary engines of social change used by leftists environmental elitists to destroy America. They have done so by infiltrating the EPA, and the US Fish & Wildlife (USF&W) the agency which decides what animals will be listed as endangered. Now, 28 years later, these renegade environmentalist wackos are prepared to use the ESA to shut down oil and gas operations in portions of Southeast New Mexico and in West Texas, including the state's top two oil producing counties. All because of a tiny lizard they claim to be endangered, and Obama who has the power to put it on a waiting list has cleared the way for it to be listed.

Through the years the EPA & the ESA have been used to shut down vast areas of America that we as Americans need to survive in a modern world.

Areas that contain, rich farmland needed to grow food that both America and foreign countries need to feed billions of people. Forest areas so rich in timber that the price of building homes could be reduced dramatically if only we were allowed to harvest them. Instead, year after year we spend billions fighting fires that reduce the timber to ashes. When it comes to energy, these government paid earth worshipers have used their power to keep us from drilling for oil, and stand in the way of building needed power plants all across America. According to a recent Congressional report America has the largest oil, coal, and natural gas reserves in the world, if tapped we could be completely energy independent. Truth is, America has enough natural energy reserves, timberland, sustainable farm land, freshwater lakes and underground reservoirs that we could reduce the cost of living for each and every American by more than 50%, if only the governments chains of restrictions were removed.

The earth worshiping environmentalists running the USF&W have used an owl to shut down logging in the Northwest, a mouse to shut down wheat farming in Colorado, a minnow and rat to end vegetable growing in California, a frog has closed fish hatcheries in the deep South, while the reintroduction of wolves are endangering the lives of ranchers, farmers, and hunters all across America from the Rockies to Maine. Now they are planning to use a lizard to shut shut down oil production in America's richest source of domestic energy, the Permian Basin of West Texas. We already have one of the largest oil reserves put off limits by the EPA in Anwar Alaska, while Obama is ignoring a Federal judges order to allow drilling to continue in the Gulf. This while almost every communist country in the world has oil wells operating in our backyard, the Gulf of Mexico.

In a logical universe, we would have politicians that would do all they can to make sure Americans had a cost of living so low that no one in America would be struggling to make ends meet. Instead these traitors would rather see Americans struggle to survive while they act as if their various government programs are saving the day. Never before in the history of the world has a countries leaders tried so hard to force its citizens to become so dependent and subservient to other countries. Many of which are our sworn enemies. Can anyone imagine Alexander, Caesar, or even George Washington forcing their citizens to humble themselves before an enemy of lesser power like Persia, Carthage, or England? No, only a modern day Judas, Ephialtes, or Benedict Arnold, would cause their own people to suffer the indignities our leaders so consistently force us to.

The current threat to America's freedom comes from a 3 inch lizard called the Sceloporus Arenicolus, or better known as the Dunes Sagebrush Lizard or the Sand Dune Lizard. It was originally classified as a subspecies of the Sceloporus Graciosus, or Common Sagebrush Lizard. Before they designated the Dune Lizards as a separate species, there were so many of them you could feed them to the Chinese as a delicacy and never run out. It was in 2002 that the Center for Biological Diversity first petitioned to have the lizard listed as endangered. The Bush administration stood in the way of the lizard being listed for 6 years, but last year Obama cleared the way by ordering his administration to back off from delaying the listing. This in spite of the news that Obama has repeatedly refused to grant species the protection for which they are known to qualify adding them instead to the waiting list. So why did he allow this lizard to be listed? There can be only one reason, and that is because Obama wants to destroy America's ability to be energy free. So his relentless attack on America's energy capabilities continues.

Go figure.

There was a rally in Roswell NM last week on April 20th that had hundreds protesting the listing and there will be another one on Tuesday April 26th, in Midland Tx at the Midland Center that begins at 5 p.m. with Congressman Mike Conaway speaking to the concerned citizens. Then on Wednesday April 27th, there will be a public hearing held at 6:30 p.m at the Midland Center. If you want to be heard then be there to support those at the front line in the battle to stop a lizard from shutting down Americas 2 largest working oil wells.

[vector7]

Energy in America: EPA Rules Force Shell to Abandon Oil Drilling Plans

By Dan Springer
Published April 25, 2011
| FoxNews.com

Shell Oil Company has announced it must scrap efforts to drill for oil this summer in the Arctic Ocean off the northern coast of Alaska. The decision comes following a ruling by the EPA’s Environmental Appeals Board to withhold critical air permits. The move has angered some in Congress and triggered a flurry of legislation aimed at stripping the EPA of its oil drilling oversight.

Shell has spent five years and nearly $4 billion dollars on plans to explore for oil in the Beaufort and Chukchi Seas. The leases alone cost $2.2 billion.

Shell Vice President Pete Slaiby says obtaining similar air permits for a drilling operation in the Gulf of Mexico would take about 45 days. He’s especially frustrated over the appeal board’s suggestion that the Arctic drill would somehow be hazardous for the people who live in the area. “We think the issues were really not major,” Slaiby said, “and clearly not impactful for the communities we work in.”

The closest village to where Shell proposed to drill is Kaktovik, Alaska. It is one of the most remote places in the United States. According to the latest census, the population is 245 and nearly all of the residents are Alaska natives. The village, which is 1 square mile, sits right along the shores of the Beaufort Sea, 70 miles away from the proposed off-shore drill site.
The EPA’s appeals board ruled that Shell had not taken into consideration emissions from an ice-breaking vessel when calculating overall greenhouse gas emissions from the project. Environmental groups were thrilled by the ruling.

“What the modeling showed was in communities like Kaktovik, Shell’s drilling would increase air pollution levels close to air quality standards,” said Eric Grafe, Earthjustice’s lead attorney on the case. Earthjustice was joined by Center for Biological Diversity and the Alaska Wilderness League in challenging the air permits.

At stake is an estimated 27 billion barrels of oil. That’s how much the U. S. Geological Survey believes is in the U.S. portion of the Arctic Ocean. For perspective, that represents two and a half times more oil than has flowed down the Trans Alaska pipeline throughout its 30-year history. That pipeline is getting dangerously low on oil. At 660,000 barrels a day, it’s carrying only one-third its capacity.

Production on the North Slope of Alaska is declining at a rate of about 7 percent a year. If the volume gets much lower, pipeline officials say they will have to shut it down. Alaska officials are blasting the Environmental Protection Agency.

“It’s driving investment and production overseas,” said Alaska’s DNR Commissioner Dan Sullivan. “That doesn’t help the United States in any way, shape or form.”

The EPA did not return repeated calls and e-mails. The Environmental Appeals Board has four members: Edward Reich, Charles Sheehan, Kathie Stein and Anna Wolgast. All are registered Democrats and Kathie Stein was an activist attorney for the Environmental Defense Fund. Members are appointed by the EPA administrator. Alaska’s Republican senator thinks it’s time to make some changes.

“EPA has demonstrated that they’re not competent to handle the process,” said Sen. Lisa Murkowski. “So if they’re not competent to handle it, they need to get out of the way.”

Murkowski supported budget amendments that would have stripped the EPA of its oversight role in Arctic offshore drilling. The Interior Department issues air permits to oil companies working in the Gulf of Mexico.

[Ryan Ruck]

Shale Boom in Texas Could Increase U.S. Oil Output

May 27, 2011

Until last year, the 17-mile stretch of road between this forsaken South Texas village and the county seat of Carrizo Springs was a patchwork of derelict gasoline stations and rusting warehouses.

Now the region is in the hottest new oil play in the country, with giant oil terminals and sprawling RV parks replacing fields of mesquite. More than a dozen companies plan to drill up to 3,000 wells around here in the next 12 months.

The Texas field, known as the Eagle Ford, is just one of about 20 new onshore oil fields that advocates say could collectively increase the nation’s oil output by 25 percent within a decade — without the dangers of drilling in the deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico or the delicate coastal areas off Alaska.

There is only one catch: the oil from the Eagle Ford and similar fields of tightly packed rock can be extracted only by using hydraulic fracturing, a method that uses a high-pressure mix of water, sand and hazardous chemicals to blast through the rocks to release the oil inside.

The technique, also called fracking, has been widely used in the last decade to unlock vast new fields of natural gas, but drillers only recently figured out how to release large quantities of oil, which flows less easily through rock than gas. As evidence mounts that fracking poses risks to water supplies, the federal government and regulators in various states are considering tighter regulations on it.

The oil industry says any environmental concerns are far outweighed by the economic benefits of pumping previously inaccessible oil from fields that could collectively hold two or three times as much oil as Prudhoe Bay, the Alaskan field that was the last great onshore discovery. The companies estimate that the boom will create more than two million new jobs, directly or indirectly, and bring tens of billions of dollars to the states where the fields are located, which include traditional oil sites like Texas and Oklahoma, industrial stalwarts like Ohio and Michigan and even farm states like Kansas.

“It’s the one thing we have seen in our adult lives that could take us away from imported oil,” said Aubrey McClendon, chief executive of Chesapeake Energy, one of the most aggressive drillers. “What if we have found three of the world’s biggest oil fields in the last three years right here in the U.S.? How transformative could that be for the U.S. economy?”

The oil rush is already transforming this impoverished area of Texas near the Mexican border, doubling real estate values in the last year and filling restaurants and hotels.

“That’s oil money,” said Bert Bell, a truck company manager, pointing to the new pickup truck he bought for his wife after making $525,000 leasing mineral rights around his family’s mobile home. “Oil money just makes life easier.”

Based on the industry’s plans, shale and other “tight rock” fields that now produce about half a million barrels of oil a day will produce up to three million barrels daily by 2020, according to IHS CERA, an energy research firm. Oil companies are investing an estimated $25 billion this year to drill 5,000 new oil wells in tight rock fields, according to Raoul LeBlanc, a senior director at PFC Energy, a consulting firm.

“This is very big and it’s coming on very fast,” said Daniel Yergin, the chairman of IHS CERA. “This is like adding another Venezuela or Kuwait by 2020, except these tight oil fields are in the United States.”

In the most developed shale field, the Bakken field in North Dakota, production has leaped to 400,000 barrels a day today from a trickle four years ago. Experts say it could produce as much as a million barrels a day by the end of the decade.

The Eagle Ford, where the first well was drilled only three years ago, is already producing more than 100,000 barrels a day and could reach 420,000 by 2015, almost as much as Ecuador, according to Bentek Energy, a consultancy.

The shale oil boom comes as production from Prudhoe Bay is declining and drilling in the Gulf of Mexico is being more closely scrutinized after last year’s Deepwater Horizon disaster.

What makes the new fields more remarkable is that they were thought to be virtually valueless only five years ago. “Everyone said the oil molecules are too large to flow in commercial quantities through these low-quality rocks,” said Mark G. Papa, chief executive of EOG Resources.

EOG began quietly buying the rights to thousands of acres in the Bakken and Eagle Ford after an EOG engineer concluded that the techniques used to extract natural gas from shale — fracking, combined with drilling horizontally through layers of rocks — could be used for oil. Chesapeake and a few other independents quickly followed. Now the biggest multinational oil companies, as well as Chinese and Norwegian firms, are investing billions of dollars in the fields.

The new drilling makes economic sense as long as oil prices remain above $60 a barrel, according to oil companies. At current oil prices of about $100 a barrel, shale wells can typically turn a profit within eight months — three times faster than many traditional wells.

But water remains a key issue. In addition to possible contamination of surface and underground water from fracking fluids, the sheer volume of water required poses challenges, especially in South Texas, which faces a severe drought and rapidly diminishing water levels in the local aquifer.

At the rate wells are being drilled, “there’s definitely going to be a problem,” said Bay Laxson, a local water official.

Dave Thompson, regional production superintendent for the oil company SM Energy said the industry knew that water issues were “an Achilles heel.” He said his company was building a system to reuse water in the field.

But unlike Pennsylvania and New York, where fracking for natural gas has produced organized opposition, the oil industry has been mostly welcomed in western and southern states.

Thanks to the drilling boom, the recession bypassed North Dakota entirely. Here in Dimmit County, Tex., the unemployment rate has fallen in half, and sales tax receipts are up 70 percent so far this year, allowing the county to hire more police officers and buy sanitation and road repair equipment.

“In my lifetime, this is the biggest thing I’ve ever seen,” said Jose Gonzalez, 78, a retired teacher and son of migrant farm workers, who leased mineral rights to Chesapeake for $27,000 and sold another plot for $100,000 to a company building an RV park for oil workers. “You can see I’m happy.”

[American Patriot]

I saw the phrase mentioned in another thread..... something to do with blowing up people's homes when the faucet is turned on....

[Ryan Ruck]

Utility Giant AEP Says It Will Close Five Coal Plants To Comply With EPA Regs

June 9, 2011

Utility giant American Electric Power said Thursday that it will shut down five coal-fired power plants and spend billions of dollars to comply with a series of pending Environmental Protection Agency regulations.

The company’s dramatic plan to comply with the regulations could give Republicans and moderate Democrats ammunition in their ongoing fight against EPA's efforts to impose new regulations aimed at limiting greenhouse gas emissions and air pollutants including mercury and arsenic.

Rep. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) and Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) immediately pounced on AEP's announcement.

“This is a perfect example of the EPA implementing rules and regulations without considering the devastating impact they may have on local economies and jobs,” Capito said.

Capito said she will write a letter to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson asking whether the agency took into account the economic impact of its regulations.

"Let me be clear, it’s decisions like the one made by AEP today that demonstrate the urgent need to rein in government agencies like the EPA, preventing them from overstepping their bounds and imposing regulations that not only cost us good American jobs, but hurt our economy," said Manchin, an outspoken critic of the EPA.

But EPA defended its regulations Thursday, noting that the agency has worked closely with industry to ensure that its regulations are “reasonable, common-sense and achievable.”

The agency also stressed that the regulations are essential for protecting public health.

“These reasonable steps taken under the Clean Air Act will reduce harmful air pollution, including mercury, arsenic and other toxic pollution, and as a result protect our families, particularly children,” EPA said in a statement.

In a statement outlining its plan to comply with EPA's regulations, AEP said it would need to retire 6,000 megawatts of coal-fired power generation in the coming years.

The company, one of the country’s largest electric utilities, estimated that it will cost between $6 billion and $8 billion in capital investments over the next decade to comply with the regulations in their current form.

The costs of complying with the regulations will result in an increase in electricity prices of 10 to 35 percent and cost 600 jobs, AEP said.

In total, AEP estimated it will have to close five coal-fired power plants by the end of 2014. Six additional plants would see major changes, including retiring some generating units, retrofitting equipment and switching to natural gas.

“We support regulations that achieve long-term environmental benefits while protecting customers, the economy and the reliability of the electric grid, but the cumulative impacts of the EPA’s current regulatory path have been vastly underestimated, particularly in Midwest states dependent on coal to fuel their economies,” AEP CEO Michael Morris said in a statement.

The company said its compliance plan could “change significantly” if EPA’s regulations are altered.

I've got an idea... Let's all drive cars you have to plug in!

[vector7]

AEP Shares Plan For Compliance With Proposed EPA Regulations

Company advocates for more time and flexibility to reduce the negative impact of the proposed EPA rules on customers, jobs and the economy


COLUMBUS, Ohio, June 9, 2011 – American Electric Power (NYSE: AEP) today announced the company’s plan for complying with a series of regulations proposed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that would impact coal-fueled power plants. Based on the regulations as proposed, AEP’s compliance plan would retire nearly 6,000 megawatts (MW) of coal-fueled power generation; upgrade or install new advanced emissions reduction equipment on another 10,100 MW; refuel 1,070 MW of coal generation as 932 MW of natural gas capacity; and build 1,220 MW of natural gas-fueled generation. The cost of AEP’s compliance plan could range from $6 billion to $8 billion in capital investment through the end of the decade. High demand for labor and materials due to a constrained compliance time frame could drive actual costs higher than these estimates. The plan, including retirements, could change significantly depending on the final form of the EPA regulations and regulatory approvals from state commissions.


The retirements and retrofits in the plan are in addition to more than $7.2 billion that AEP has invested since 1990 to reduce emissions from its coal-fueled generation fleet. The company Annual emissions of nitrogen oxides from AEP plants are 80 percent lower today than in 1990. Sulfur dioxide emissions from AEP plants are 73 percent lower than in 1990 currently owns nearly 25,000 MW of coal-fueled generation, approximately 65 percent of its total generating capacity. Coal would fuel approximately 57 percent of AEP’s total generating capacity by the end of the decade.


“We support regulations that achieve long-term environmental benefits while protecting customers, the economy and the reliability of the electric grid, but the cumulative impacts of the EPA’s current regulatory path have been vastly underestimated, particularly in Midwest states dependent on coal to fuel their economies. We have worked for months to develop a compliance plan that will mitigate the impact of these rules for our customers and preserve jobs, but because of the unrealistic compliance timelines in the EPA proposals, we will have to prematurely shut down nearly 25 percent of our current coal-fueled generating capacity, cut hundreds of good power plant jobs, and invest billions of dollars in capital to retire, retrofit and replace coal-fueled power plants. The sudden increase in electricity rates and impacts on state economies will be significant at a time when people and states are still struggling,” said Michael G. Morris, AEP chairman and chief executive officer.


Although some jobs would be created from the installation of emissions reduction equipment, AEP expects a net loss of approximately 600 power plant jobs with annual wages totaling approximately $40 million as a result of compliance with the proposed EPA rules.


“We are deeply concerned about the impact of the proposed regulations on our customers and local economies. Communities that have depended on these plants to provide good jobs and support local services will face significant reductions in payroll and property taxes in a very short period of time. The economic impact will extend far beyond direct employment at power plants as thousands of ancillary jobs are supported by every coal-fueled generating unit. Businesses that have benefited from reasonably priced coal-fueled power will face the impact of electricity price increases ranging from 10 percent to more than 35 percent just for compliance with these environmental rules at a time when they are still trying to recover from the economic downturn,” Morris said.


“Although discounted by some, the potential impacts on the reliability of the transmission system, particularly in the Midwest, are significant. The proposed timelines for compliance aren’t adequate for construction of significant retrofits or replacement generation, so many coal-fueled plants would be prematurely retired or idled in just a few years. AEP’s compliance plan alone would abruptly cut generation capacity in the Midwest by more than 5,400 MW. Depending on the year, another 1,500 MW to 5,200 MW of AEP generation would be idled or curtailed for extended periods as pollution control equipment is installed,” Morris said.


AEP has shared its compliance plan with PJM Interconnection, Southwest Power Pool and North American Electric Reliability Corp. for use in their evaluation of the impacts of EPA’s proposed rules.

“We will continue to work through the EPA process with the hope that the agency will recognize the cumulative impact of the proposed rules and develop a more reasonable compliance schedule. We also will continue talking with lawmakers in Washington about a legislative approach that would achieve the same long-term environmental goals with less negative impact on jobs and the U.S. economy,” Morris said. “With more time and flexibility, we will get to the same level of emission reductions, but it will cost our customers less and will prevent premature job losses, extend the construction job benefits, and ensure the ongoing reliability of the electric system.”


AEP’s current plan for compliance with the rules as proposed includes permanently retiring the following coal-fueled power plants:

• Glen Lyn Plant, Glen Lyn, Va. – 335 MW (retired by Dec. 31, 2014);
• Kammer Plant, Moundsville, W.Va. – 630 MW (retired by Dec. 31, 2014);
• Kanawha River Plant, Glasgow, W.Va. – 400 MW (retired by Dec. 31, 2014);
• Phillip Sporn Plant, New Haven, W.Va. – 1,050 MW (450 MW expected to retire in 2011, 600 MW retired by Dec. 31, 2014); and
• Picway Plant, Lockbourne, Ohio – 100 MW (retired by Dec. 31, 2014).

AEP would retire generating units at the following locations but continue operating some generation at the sites:

• Big Sandy Plant, Louisa, Ky. – Units 1 and 2 (1,078 MW) retired by Dec. 31, 2014;
• Big Sandy Unit 1 would be rebuilt as a 640-MW natural gas plant by Dec. 31, 2015;
• Clinch River Plant, Cleveland, Va. – Unit 3 (235 MW) retired by Dec. 31, 2014; Units 1 and 2 (470 MW total) would be refueled with natural gas with a capacity of 422 MW by Dec. 31, 2014;
• Conesville Plant, Conesville, Ohio – Unit 3 (165 MW) retired by Dec. 31, 2012; Units 5 and 6 (800 MW total) would continue operating with retrofits;
• Muskingum River Plant, Beverly, Ohio – Units 1-4 (840 MW) retired by Dec. 31, 2014; Muskingum River Unit 5 (600 MW) may be refueled with natural gas with a capacity of 510 MW by Dec. 31, 2014, depending on regulatory treatment in Ohio;
• Tanners Creek Plant, Lawrenceburg, Ind. – Units 1, 2 and 3 (495 MW) retired by Dec. 31, 2014; Unit 4 (500 MW) would continue to operate with retrofits; and
• Welsh Plant, Pittsburg, Texas – Unit 2 (528 MW) retired by Dec. 31, 2014; Units 1 and 3 (1,056 MW) would continue to operate with retrofits.

The two coal-fueled generating units at Northeastern Plant (935 MW) in Oolagah, Okla., would be idled for a year or more while emission reduction equipment is installed. Both units would be idled beginning Jan. 1, 2016. One unit would return to service by Dec. 31, 2016. The other unit would return to service by Dec. 31, 2017.



AEP will complete construction of the Dresden Plant (580 MW natural gas) in Dresden, Ohio, in 2012.

In addition to the retrofits above, AEP would install or upgrade emissions reduction equipment at seven other coal-fueled power plants in Arkansas, Indiana, Louisiana, Ohio and Texas.

American Electric Power is one of the largest electric utilities in the United States, delivering electricity to more than 5 million customers in 11 states. AEP ranks among the nation’s largest generators of electricity, owning nearly 38,000 megawatts of generating capacity in the U.S. AEP also owns the nation’s largest electricity transmission system, a nearly 39,000-mile network that includes more 765-kilovolt extra-high voltage transmission lines than all other U.S. transmission systems combined. AEP’s transmission system directly or indirectly serves about 10 percent of the electricity demand in the Eastern Interconnection, the interconnected transmission system that covers 38 eastern and central U.S. states and eastern Canada, and approximately 11 percent of the electricity demand in ERCOT, the transmission system that covers much of Texas. AEP’s utility units operate as AEP Ohio, AEP Texas, Appalachian Power (in Virginia and West Virginia), AEP Appalachian Power (in Tennessee), Indiana Michigan Power, Kentucky Power, Public Service Company of Oklahoma, and Southwestern Electric Power Company (in Arkansas, Louisiana and east Texas). AEP’s headquarters are in Columbus, Ohio.

[vector7]

How the Obama Administration is destroying America's cheap energy while giving it to the Axis

Glenn Beck 06 21 2011

[Ryan Ruck]

I decided to start this thread to consolidate the many threads about how the EPA's increasingly overbearing behavior.

Other threads will be moved into this one as they are found.

[Ryan Ruck]

Cat Recalling Engines EPA Says Didn't Meet Emissions Standards; Will Pay $2.55 Million Fine

August 2, 2011

Caterpillar is recalling more than 590,000 on-highway and off-road diesel engines and will pay a $2.55 million penalty to resolve alleged Clean Air Act violations for shipping the engines without the correct emissions controls. Caterpillar also allegedly failed to comply with emission control reporting and engine-labeling requirements.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) announced a settlement with Caterpillar last week.

From February 2002 to November 2006, the government says, Caterpillar shipped nearly 600,000 engines, both off-road and on-highway, to more than 50 original equipment manufacturers, that were not equipped with the aftertreatment devices and/or fuel programming software that were present on Cat engines that were certified by EPA.

As a result, says the EPA, the engines emitted excess nitrogen oxides and particulate matter.

In cases where the aftertreatment device was the problem, the table of engines in the legal complaint notes that the aftertreatment devices were shipped separately from the engines.

"Caterpillar denies any wrongdoing, but does agree that the decree represents a good faith effort between the parties to resolve their differences and avoid potentially lengthy litigation," said Cat in a statement. "Caterpillar is committed to following the terms of the decree."

The company also notes that many of the engines in question have already been fixed as part of an earlier recall, reports ENR.

Caterpillar will recall the affected engines and install the correct aftertreatment devices and reprogram the fuel injector and fuel map settings. This recall will continue until all engines with incorrect catalysts, fuel injectors or fuel map settlings have been addressed or until December 31, 2011, whichever is earlier.

In addition to the recall, Caterpillar will mitigate excess emissions through permanent retirement of banked emission credits.

The proposed settlement is subject to a 30-day public comment period and final court approval. For more information: http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resour...llarinc11.html

Rumor is that Cat is being targeted by the administration because of their sales of dozers to the Israeli military.

[vector7]

The Dots are all converging into a the same Leftist MO: A Very Dirty Story

[Luke]

Old George was ahead of his time,

One, two, three, four...
Hrmm!
One, two, (one, two, three, four!)

Let me tell you how it will be;
There's one for you, nineteen for me.
'Cause I’m the taxman,
Yeah, I’m the taxman.

Should five per cent appear too small,
Be thankful I don't take it all.
'Cause I’m the taxman,
Yeah, I’m the taxman.

(if you drive a car, car - I’ll tax the street;
(if you try to sit, sit - I’ll tax your seat;
(if you get too cold, cold - I’ll tax the heat;
(if you take a walk, walk - I'll tax your feet.

Taxman!

'Cause I’m the taxman,
Yeah, I’m the taxman.

Don't ask me what I want it for, (ah-ah, mister Wilson)
If you don't want to pay some more. (ah-ah, mister heath)
'Cause I’m the taxman,
Yeah, I’m the taxman.

Now my advice for those who die, (taxman)
Declare the pennies on your eyes. (taxman)
'Cause I’m the taxman,
Yeah, I’m the taxman.

And you're working for no one but me.

Taxman!

[Luke]

Next they will say all that glue I ate in kindergarten and sniffed building model airplanes bamaged my drain.

[American Patriot]

I think I have drain bamage too.....from ... umm... glue... or something.

[Ryan Ruck]

Beaver County, Pennsylvania Man Fined For Destroying Wetlands

August 19, 2011

The Department of Environmental Protection fined a Beaver County man $137,000 for destroying two wetland acres in Marshall, Allegheny County, while building a recreational pond on his property.

Francois Bitz, of Baden, didn't have any permits when he excavated two acres of wetlands and affected 1,100 feet of a stream off of Big Sewickley Creek in 2009 and 2010, according to the DEP. Big Sewickley Creek is classified as a trout-stocked fishery.

Under an agreement, Bitz wll also pay recovery and oversight costs to the DEP and the Allegheny County Conservation District.

[American Patriot]

It's time to shut them down.

Why aren't we, or the Tea Party up in arms about this?

Close this agency DOWN.